About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Discuss and learn about the traditional Mahayana scriptures, without assuming that any one school ‘owns’ the only correct interpretation.
User avatar
tkp67
Posts: 2905
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by tkp67 »

If I had to guess

the living moment in which consciousness is experienced

the same reference also applies to the timing in which the ten buddha of the ten directions and three times are in attendance
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by LastLegend »

smcj wrote: Sat May 09, 2020 3:55 am
Totally understood we are bound by karma. But Buddha nature has be understood here and now.
What do you mean by “...understand here and now”?
I mean we are heavily deluded karmic beings and the only thing that helps is experiencing Buddha Nature in our ordinary life. What we think or imagine total awakening could be very well delusion.
It’s eye blinking.
Druniel
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:23 pm

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Druniel »

Grigoris wrote: Fri May 08, 2020 2:39 pm
Taikor.Taikun wrote: Thu May 07, 2020 5:55 pmThe raft analogy makes sense to me. If i understand correctly, we’re suppose to develop and then undo or deconstruct our level of enlightenment continuously in order to develop new level until we reach full enlightenment
No. The raft simile is about considering provisional teachings as provisional. Once a teaching no longer serves a purpose, then we can discard it.

Do not confuse enlightenment (Nirvana) with knowledge (abhijana).

Nirvana is a hell of a lot more than just knowing.
About being dinamic, changing and same time the same 'I, 'you are talking logically, Dharma is beyond logic, as Buddha, clearly and often states in Pali texts. We are the same and different also, as you see your child photo, it is you, but also is different is some aspect.

Regarding the Draft Sutta I think you are right. But still to put this stuff in words, with the general bynar thinking system of humans, is not very congenial.
Druniel
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:23 pm

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Druniel »

zerwe wrote: Fri May 08, 2020 3:25 pm
Grigoris wrote: Fri May 08, 2020 2:42 pm
Druniel wrote: Sun Apr 19, 2020 1:12 amActually we are the best prove that you can be the same and changing in the same time.
No, something cannot be unchanging and changing at the same time. It is impossible. We are the best proof that we are changing. Unless you truly believe that you are the same person now as you were when you were born. That would be pretty deluded.

It would mean that you are still shitting and pissing yourself, that you would still be breast-feeding, that you would be incapable of communicating except through crying and not able to focus your eyes further then 30cm away.
I would have to really dig for the source (I think it may be Buddhapalita), but one commentary (and perhaps oral tradition) that examines this objection points out that the consequences of accepting something as changing and unchanging are that; continua as we know them could not exist, the laws of cause and effect would not function, we would not experience the ripening of our own actions, we would experience the effects of an non-related origin, former and latter selves would be equally "other," etc...

This refutation of the objection is offered in the context of Tsongkhapa's Four Point Analysis.

Shaun :namaste:
The thing is that is this too mathematic. There are things changing of course and something not changing in ourselves, probably this is the ineffable Self, that also Vasubandhu mentions, I don't like to quote, Seven Works of Vasubandhu, the Buddhist Psychological Doctor:


*anavilapya atman*

" *it is selfessness in reference to a constructed self*, i. e., all those things that constitute the own-being believed in by fools, that is the constructed with its objects apprehended and subject apprehendors,etc, and *not in reference to
 the ineffable Self, which is the scope of the Buddhas* "

If we had not a spiritual essence, we wouldn't have nothing to be based on, in order to 'progress' spiritually, simple as that. You cannot build up any kinf of understandin, either mundane or supermundane, unless you have some kind of 'I' operating, and one day trasmutating in the Self, even Vasubandhu talks about. Best Regards
Bristollad
Posts: 1121
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:39 am

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Bristollad »

Druniel wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:49 am There are things changing of course and something not changing in ourselves
Show me this unchanging "something".
The antidote—to be free from the suffering of samsara—you need to be free from delusion and karma; you need to be free from ignorance, the root of samsara. So you need to meditate on emptiness. That is what you need. Lama Zopa Rinpoche
zerwe
Posts: 778
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:25 am
Location: North Carolina

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by zerwe »

Druniel wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:49 am
zerwe wrote: Fri May 08, 2020 3:25 pm
Grigoris wrote: Fri May 08, 2020 2:42 pm No, something cannot be unchanging and changing at the same time. It is impossible. We are the best proof that we are changing. Unless you truly believe that you are the same person now as you were when you were born. That would be pretty deluded.

It would mean that you are still shitting and pissing yourself, that you would still be breast-feeding, that you would be incapable of communicating except through crying and not able to focus your eyes further then 30cm away.
I would have to really dig for the source (I think it may be Buddhapalita), but one commentary (and perhaps oral tradition) that examines this objection points out that the consequences of accepting something as changing and unchanging are that; continua as we know them could not exist, the laws of cause and effect would not function, we would not experience the ripening of our own actions, we would experience the effects of an non-related origin, former and latter selves would be equally "other," etc...

This refutation of the objection is offered in the context of Tsongkhapa's Four Point Analysis.

Shaun :namaste:
The thing is that is this too mathematic. There are things changing of course and something not changing in ourselves, probably this is the ineffable Self, that also Vasubandhu mentions, I don't like to quote, Seven Works of Vasubandhu, the Buddhist Psychological Doctor:


*anavilapya atman*

" *it is selfessness in reference to a constructed self*, i. e., all those things that constitute the own-being believed in by fools, that is the constructed with its objects apprehended and subject apprehendors,etc, and *not in reference to
 the ineffable Self, which is the scope of the Buddhas* "

If we had not a spiritual essence, we wouldn't have nothing to be based on, in order to 'progress' spiritually, simple as that. You cannot build up any kinf of understandin, either mundane or supermundane, unless you have some kind of 'I' operating, and one day trasmutating in the Self, even Vasubandhu talks about. Best Regards
I think that you may be missing the target here. There is no attaining or building upon anything. It is about understanding what never was to begin with. "I" is a fundamental misunderstanding. You seem to ascribe to a materialist or essentialist view. The stance you propose is subject to the fallacies highlighted in the previous post--the law of cause and effect can not function, continua of any sort can not function, and etc...In the same, Madhyamka still does not refute or negate conventional phenomena.

Shaun :namaste:
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

This is just a typical and somewhat yawn-inducing "Atmanyana" type argument - "I feel stuff so I must be real in the way I think I am", it's a terrible argument and easily deconstructed by simple analysis of mental phenomena. A variation I've seen is that memories feel like they have continuity and consistency, so they must have some kind of permanence...not the most impressive counter to Madhymaka I've ever seen.

That, and a few places where the claim is put forward that the Buddha was actually teaching that we should focus our training on some divine essence, etc. and He was just using via negativa to get people there. It's an argument that thoroughly misunderstands Buddhism and confuses philosophy for praxis, among other things.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Druniel wrote: Sun Feb 02, 2020 12:16 am Hi
In my intuition and throu Pâli and Samskrit sûtra
I rekon that Buddha never spoke of no-self.
I see that some scholars also see like that, a minority. I see Buddha teaching using a Via Negativa kind of way, (which He say was often misunderstood for a nichilistic one by peoples in His times) keeping silent about some questions without describing any truth in details, but speaking some rare times, about a supreme state of bliss ,Nirvana , which is the end of soffering. I observe a sort of nichilistic adrift during the centuries due, among others, to a certain attitude of the Theravada school insisting on the anatta as if it was a Theory, which never was, that we easily know from the Sūtta, where Buddha say that all theories are not correct and that His Dharma is beyond logic and intellectual understanding. Is there anybody here who agree on this?

Ps;. In a quite sophisticated way some scholars use to say that Buddha simply doesn't deny the self because He doesn't pose one in first instance, but that would be just nihilism anyway, and Buddha clearly states that He is not a nichilist teacher, nor a philosopher.
1. The Buddha doesn’t say that the experience of a self doesn’t occur. Indeed, he teaches totally within that context. But...

2. What is taught is that nowhere within the aggregates (skandhas) can a ‘self’ be found.

3. What Buddha means by regarding ‘all theories are incorrect’ (not sure that’s even an accurate interpretation) is that theories are limited conceptualizations and thus incapable of describing that which is beyond concepts.

4. There is a remote possibility that a Dharma student’s intuition can be slightly off if they don’t really know what they are talking about.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by LastLegend »

Druniel wrote: Sun Feb 02, 2020 12:16 am Hi
In my intuition and throu Pâli and Samskrit sûtra
I rekon that Buddha never spoke of no-self.
I see that some scholars also see like that, a minority. I see Buddha teaching using a Via Negativa kind of way, (which He say was often misunderstood for a nichilistic one by peoples in His times) keeping silent about some questions without describing any truth in details, but speaking some rare times, about a supreme state of bliss ,Nirvana , which is the end of soffering. I observe a sort of nichilistic adrift during the centuries due, among others, to a certain attitude of the Theravada school insisting on the anatta as if it was a Theory, which never was, that we easily know from the Sūtta, where Buddha say that all theories are not correct and that His Dharma is beyond logic and intellectual understanding. Is there anybody here who agree on this?

Ps;. In a quite sophisticated way some scholars use to say that Buddha simply doesn't deny the self because He doesn't pose one in first instance, but that would be just nihilism anyway, and Buddha clearly states that He is not a nichilist teacher, nor a philosopher.
What is nihilism?
It’s eye blinking.
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Nihilism is the notion that nothing exists, no form of Buddhism teaches that nothing exists.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
Budai
Posts: 878
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:12 pm
Location: ༀ ∞ Nam Myoho Renge Kyo ∞ ༀ

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Budai »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 11:19 pm Nihilism is the notion that nothing exists, no form of Buddhism teaches that nothing exists.
What are some of the important things that Buddhism Teaches dont exist though, as well as, what is the philosophy that certain things aren’t “real” that the Buddhist Dharmic perception is expounding?
Last edited by Budai on Mon Apr 12, 2021 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
amanitamusc
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by amanitamusc »

Based on Druniel's history of posting in this thread we can expect a response to reply's in the spring of 2022. :zzz:
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Könchok Chödrak wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 11:23 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 11:19 pm Nihilism is the notion that nothing exists, no form of Buddhism teaches that nothing exists.
What are some of the important things that Buddhism Teaches dont exist though, as well as, what is the philosophy that certain things aren’t “real” that the Buddhist Dharmic perception is expounding?
Rabbits with horns
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Supramundane
Posts: 621
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Supramundane »

LastLegend wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 11:10 pm
Druniel wrote: Sun Feb 02, 2020 12:16 am Hi
In my intuition and throu Pâli and Samskrit sûtra
I rekon that Buddha never spoke of no-self.
I see that some scholars also see like that, a minority. I see Buddha teaching using a Via Negativa kind of way, (which He say was often misunderstood for a nichilistic one by peoples in His times) keeping silent about some questions without describing any truth in details, but speaking some rare times, about a supreme state of bliss ,Nirvana , which is the end of soffering. I observe a sort of nichilistic adrift during the centuries due, among others, to a certain attitude of the Theravada school insisting on the anatta as if it was a Theory, which never was, that we easily know from the Sūtta, where Buddha say that all theories are not correct and that His Dharma is beyond logic and intellectual understanding. Is there anybody here who agree on this?

Ps;. In a quite sophisticated way some scholars use to say that Buddha simply doesn't deny the self because He doesn't pose one in first instance, but that would be just nihilism anyway, and Buddha clearly states that He is not a nichilist teacher, nor a philosopher.
What is nihilism?
Nihilism = we are just a body that dies
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: About a nihilistic adrift of Buddhadharma

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Post Reply

Return to “Sūtra Studies”